AI will reduce workforce, say 41% of execs in a survey

I predict a huge demand of workforce in five years, when they finally realized AI doesn't drive innovation, but recycles old ideas over and over.

In my experience, 100% of executives don't actually know what their workforce does day-to-day, so it doesn't really surprise me that they think they can lay people off because they started using ChatGPT to write their emails.

Well it's good to know 59% of execs are aware that AI isn't gonna change shit

Can AI replace executives too?

Say execs. You know, the people who view labor as a cost center.

They say that because that’s what they want to happen, not because it’s a good idea.

Can't wait for AI to replace all those useless execs and CEOs. It's not like they even do much anyways, except fondling their stocks. They could probably be automated by a markov chain

AI will (be a great excuse to) reduce workforce, say 41% of people who get bonuses if they do.

If Gartner comes out with a decent AI model, you could replace over half of your CIOs, CISOs, CTOs, etc. Most of them lack any real leadership qualities and simply parrot what they're told/what they've read. They're their through nepotism.

Also, most of them use AI as a crutch, so that's all they know. Meanwhile, the rest of us use it as a tool (what it's meant to be).

59% of execs are wrong.

41% execs think that a huge amount of class power will go from workers in general to AI specialists (and probally the companies they make or that hire them).

I personally can't wait for a lot these businesses that bet on the wrong people to replace turn around and form new competition but with this new tech filling in the gaps of middle management, hr, execs, etc.

I mean its fucking meme, but an AI assisted workplace democracy seems alright to me on paper (the devils in details).

Thankfully I don't even wanna work. I just wanna live and if that's not possible, exist.

People here keep belittling AI. You're all wrong, at least when considering the long run... We can't beat it. We need to outlaw it.

Train it to replace CEO's.

Here’s a thought: let’s get rid of 41% of execs instead.

And that means lower prices for consumers. Right? Guys.. r.. right?

As someone scripting a lot for my department in the tech industry, yea AI and scripts have a lot of potential to reduce labor. However, given how chaotic this industry is, there will still need to be humans to take into account the variables that scripts and AI haven't been trained on (or are otherwise hard to predict). I know the managers don't wanna spend their time on these issues, as there's plenty more for them to deal with. When there's true AGI, that may be a different scenario, but time will tell.

Currently, we need to have some people in each department overseeing the automations of their area. This stuff mostly kills the super redundant data entry tasks that make me feel cross eyed by the end of my shift. I don't wanna be the embodiment of vlookup between pdfs and type the same number 4+ times.

There is no denial a.i. is going to replace or significantly reduce some jobs. But I predict it's going to happen mostly in bullshit job like marketing, advertisement, the kind of journalism that repeat the same news from other reputed newspaper.

A.i. isn't going to replace the migrants that lay bricks in front on me, it's not going to replace their chief.

It’ll reduce the workforce from well-remunerated professionals who perform tasks to a larger number of disposable minimum-wage labourers who clean up botshit.

Biz leaders optimistic it can reduce living, breathing cost centers... er, valued workers

And aggregate demand needed to buy the shit they produce. But that's not this corpo's problem. Not until most corpos are doing it.

AI will remove 41% of execs, say 100% of people who know what AI is.

I always ask myself who will buy the products these companies produce if all the workers have been fired. Maybe inflation is just the natural ramp up to McDonald's charging 5,000 dollars for automated chicken nuggets when there are only billionaire left with money lol.

I never had the impression that there were enough people for the amount of work anyways. I don't see jobs go, but shift. Most developers will be fine, because of never ending work, AI is just a tool speeding things up. But not that much, as someone who is good with Google and git, is just a bit slower to find the same answers. And AI needs verification too, even if it links you directly to the issue at hand, via source url.

AI will create new issues. Some of the low level requirement jobs will go, like working in first level support, but only if you learn the AI yourself, else it's too generic. We're not there yet, where companies learn their own LLM yet. some outlier try.

We got to understand that there's still a human layer and a lot of people might prefer calling a human, even if the result is worse, simply because we're social beings. This can cost a lot of customers, if companies believe they can just shove an AI in front.

No one really knows how good AI will get. As the technology advances, we find more and more hard to solve issues, for instance that AI will make things up or gives wrong answers, despite knowing the real answer, if you pressure hard enough.

Also for security reasons you can't add AI everywhere, unless you want to send all secrets directly to Microsoft, Google or Facebook.

My 5 cents.

Surely, this can’t and won’t backfire… /s

41% of execs maybe

This is why not every business is successful I guess

🎵Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb🎶

Imo when you make an industry easier for the managers/ceos using ai and have fewer workers, it will also be easier for people to create competition in that industry... driving down prices.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A survey of senior biz executives reveals that 41 percent expect to have a smaller workforce in five years due to the implementation of AI technologies.

The research from staffing provider and recruitment agency Adecco Group found a "buy mindset" around AI, which "could exacerbate skills scarcity and create a two-speed workforce."

The figure is highest in Germany and France, where 49 percent of respondents say their company will employ fewer people in five years because of AI.

Seventy-eight percent of respondents say GenAI will play a "critical role in providing upskilling and development opportunities."

"While there is no denying that commercial interest in AI has been driven by its ability to reduce headcounts, the disruption will be a positive one – these industries have been suffering from decades-long skills crises, short on talent due to the high barriers to entry.

"Robotic engineers, data governors, drug discovery analysts – these are the jobs tomorrow that rely on AI," she told us.

The original article contains 438 words, the summary contains 161 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

Who do these assholes think will buy their products and services when they put the entire workforce out of work? Do they plan to retreat to their bunkers and live out their days underground while the world burns above?

And as a result the remaining workforce will have to work more.

If it isn't yet, AI will be calling the shots on the actual money owners (those big investment companies like Blackrock). Invest here, invest there, demand more from elsewhere. Said AI will then dictate who should be appointed CEO, director, etc, because it will be asked to name "a human" and little Timmy McMeritocracy, son of a high up elsewhere, needs his first job, nevermind that putting an AI in his place would be more profitable.

“41% of execs display anomalous sexual prowess, 9” dongs thought to play a role.”

Can't wait for the 94% unemployed to raid the banks and eat the Bankers.

So, when am I gonna see some of all that UBI?

Bye bye middle management!

But seriously, work will always expand to the available workforce. That's why there are so many stupid industries. They always tank during a resession, but other industries will expand to use excess labor.